[2021] KECA 796 (KLR)

[2021] KECA 796 (KLR)

The Court found that while the applicant's intended appeal raised arguable issues regarding the trial judge's findings on adverse possession, the second limb of the test under rule 5(2)(b) was not satisfied. The applicant had already been evicted from the suit properties and the respondent had taken possession,...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2021] KECA 796 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Emilio Marangu M'Ndiiri; Respondent: Angero Munene Marindi
Court
Court of Appeal
Court Station
Court of Appeal at Nyeri
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Appeal (Application) 80 of 2019
Procedural Posture
Stay Application / Ruling on Application for Stay of Execution Pending Intended Appeal
Outcome
application dismissed
Judges
FI Koome, AK Murgor
Legal Topics
Adverse Possession, Stay of Execution, Eviction Orders, Ownership Disputes
Source Language
en
Land and Property Civil Procedure Adverse Possession Stay of Execution Eviction Orders Ownership Disputes

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Emilio Marangu M'Ndiiri

Applicant

Angero Munene Marindi

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Stay Application / Ruling on Application for Stay of Execution Pending Intended Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has satisfied the conditions for grant of stay of execution under rule 5(2)(b) of the Court of Appeal Rules.
  2. 2 Whether the intended appeal raises arguable points of law.
  3. 3 Whether the appeal would be rendered nugatory if stay is not granted, considering the applicant's eviction has already occurred.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found that while the applicant's intended appeal raised arguable issues regarding the trial judge's findings on adverse possession, the second limb of the test under rule 5(2)(b) was not satisfied. The applicant had already been evicted from the suit properties and the respondent had taken possession, meaning there was nothing left for the Court to stay. As a result, the application for stay of execution was dismissed as moot, with costs to be determined in the intended appeal.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • The Notice of Motion dated 30th May 2019 is dismissed.
  • Costs in the intended appeal.